From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ryan v. Keller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 28, 1965
24 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Opinion

October 28, 1965

Appeal from the Niagara Special Term.

Present — Williams, P.J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecchio, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed, without costs to this appeal to any party, and motion denied. Memorandum: This action was commenced in January, 1962 to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by the infant on August 22, 1960. A note of issue was filed in March, 1962 and an amended bill of particulars was served more than a year thereafter. It is apparent therefrom that plaintiff was aware of the claimed permanent visual damage requiring the wearing of corrective lenses. Nevertheless, there was a further delay of 18 months until the present motion was made (after the cause was on the Day Calendar) for leave to serve an amended bill of particulars and to increase the amount demanded in the ad damnum clause by the sum of $40,000. In the light of this inordinate and unexplained delay the granting of relief was an improvident exercise of discretion. (Cf. Hernandez v. Ezrow, 24 A.D.2d 730; Miller v. Davis, 24 A.D.2d 730.)


Summaries of

Ryan v. Keller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Oct 28, 1965
24 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)
Case details for

Ryan v. Keller

Case Details

Full title:JOHN RYAN, Individually and as Guardian ad Litem of KENNETH RYAN, an…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Oct 28, 1965

Citations

24 A.D.2d 837 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Citing Cases

McLeod v. Duffy

Memorandum: An inordinate delay in applying for permission to serve supplemental bills of particulars which…

Douglas v. Latona

To do so would be an improvident exercise of discretion ( Miller v. Davis, 24 A.D.2d 730) especially so when…